Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
In our world, we have many different truth and standards of rationality between religion/country/culture/race/moral in different times.
There arent. You need to study basic logic. We have valid cultural/religious worldview but that doesnt mean they are the ultimate truth. There can only be one truth. If you can give me an example where there are '2 rationalities' then i would love to hear it from you.
I haven't say they're the ultimate truth, i say there're many different version of truth.
It's a possible situation that there can only be one ultimate truth, but in our world we have many different version of truth.
Some christians feels it's irrational to not follow their God's moral/law. Others may disagree with them and feels it's irrational to follow their God's moral/law.
All of these topics can/need to be debated in order to achieve a ultimate true logical view of the world. there cant be 2 truths. you always say your truth is the ultimate, unless you are irrational yourself, and everybody else is mistaken.
I haven't say those topics can't or needn't to be debated.
It's possible there can't be 2 ultimate truths, and i haven't say there're 2 ultimate truths.
I haven't say my version of truth is the ultimate truth, but my version of truth is convincing or rational to myself, if it's not convincing or rational to myself then it'll not be my version of truth.
i believe, as it is apparant, that the word 'truth' already inhabits the 'ultimate' in it self, i pointed out that its 'ultimate truth' to make it simpler, like saying american americans(duh, we already know that americans are american!). so there cant be 2 truths. and one can arrive at it through discussion, arguments and evidence. I presented an argument and examples for why it is irrational to do such and such but there was no disagreement our counter argument made, so we must assume and believe that it is true.
If you prefer then i'll change the word to "knowledge".
I can't see your meaning or it's relation.
It's a possible situation that there can't be 2 ultimate truths.
I doubt anyone have already achieve the ultimate truths, even if they're, there's no ways for me to know they're genuine or not.
Can you specify which post have your argument and examples that why it is irrational to do such things?
Okay its very good that you changed the word, it shows a healthy mind who seeks to understand. Knowledge is a fine word and absolutely many people contradict eachother and many of these people can be proven wrong.
saying 'ultimate truth' is like saying 'american americans' or 'round circle'. One already knows that americans are american or that circles are round similarly one already knows that truth is ultimate and therefore there is no need to use the combination of 'ultimate truth' just like 'round circle'.
No, thats fine.
through debate and dialog it is possible.
Its post #1210. check it out yourself, if you want.
I personally think anal sex is disgusting, particularly hetero anal sex. (For some reason, anal between men isn't as disgusting to me.) But not all gay and bisexual men are into anal sex in the first place. Oral sex is the most common form of gay male sex, anyway.
I think if she can stay clean there cant go anything wrong and if she knows when and how to move her behind to turn you on then its perfect. Gay men are basically the same though perhaps gay men know eachother even better, since they are of equal mind-set and gender they can have a greater sexual experience together. Oral sex is just as irrational as anal though, the mouth is for 1) breathing (if you dont breathe through the nose), 2) drinking 3) eating 4) talking 5) brushing teeth and hygiene. not for sex, infact if somebody does oral on you he/she doesnt experience some sort of tasty orgasm in her mouth its all taking place in the brain. but with the sex organs you experience direct joy of touch, namely because they are for sex. same with anal in most cases, im not so sure how a woman would experience anal joy at all. unless it somehow rubs against the vaginal wall - but that wouldnt be the anal doing the pleasure instead the other organ.
Well, even if a person A think that he've prove another person B that B is wrong, that doesn't automatically makes A credible. How do we know if A's proof is genuine or not? We examine it by using our own logic/reason, but then everyone's logic/reason may differ greatly between them.
Thanks for explaining, and since i have changed the word to knowledge, i think the confusion is also clear.
Okay.
It may possible.
Post #1210:
It's just your personal prefer standards to say that this or that is not made or designed to be used for some specific actions.
If somebody proves to you that 2+2=4 you dont need to use any logic or reason anymore. If you have some specific examples how it can be otherwise then please share them.
Again i would like an example. Do you have something specific in mind here? Like person A saying that there is only 1 god and person B saying that there are many gods?
1) Why can't it be a function for it (anus)? Because it is mainly used for excretion. Vaginas arent mainly used for excretion unless shes a virgin and doesnt have a partner. Also you cant derive the same sexual pleasure from touch the way you experience it with your main sexual organs.
Your using of easy math 2+2=4 in comparison of other complex things is inappropriate.
Yes, your given example is acceptable.
"Because it is mainly used for excretion" is just an arbitrarily reason.
This is just an arbitrarily reason.
If it's irrational for anyone to find some authority which they find convincing to them to follow, then how credible is your argument in the comparison? Can it be also say that just because you think that you've a lot of knowledge which only convincing to yourself, and your explaining of this knowledge doesn't prove it right, merely by your saying that?
we can use deductive logic which is as simple as math:
How is it arbitrary? Its an absolute fact that it is used for excretion and not for other functions, including sex. And i didnt say that you cant derive pleasure from it, just not the same sexual pleasure as with the main sexual organs. Just think of oral sex, does the partner who performs oral sex on you get some sort of tasty orgasm in her mouth? No. But with the main sexual organs you do most of the time. Therefore the mouth is not its primary function to have sex with. same with anal, there is no anal liquid orgasm.
my argument doesn rely on authority. i am not trying to prove myself right by the sheer power of my voice.
What is A/B/C ?
In order to claim it to be an absolute fact, please explain why you think so and present absolute evidence.
There is prostate in the anal sex which can occur sexual pleasure.
No problem.
Men(A) are mortal(B)
No problem, and i can't see how your example relate to what we discuss.
You mean the proof is common sense?
Are you primerly using your mouth for sex, to bite people or what? how is it not common sense?
How do I deal with it? I don't. You are free to think some sexual acts are irrational but I believe that whatever a couple wants to do and the act is fine with both of them, it's their business, not mine.